The Degree of Concordance Between the Content of Sleep Talking and Mentation Recalled in Wakefulness

Arkin, Arthur M.; Toth, Max F.; Baker, Julia; Hastey, John M.

doi:10.1097/00005053-197012000-00003

Cited by 29 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Foulkes (1999, p. 10) notes that other sleep behavior such as sleep walking rarely corresponds to dream reports and “there is a somewhat better, but still imperfect, relation between sleep speech and dream speech.” Arkin et al (1966,1970a,b), argue that they demonstrate significant overlap between dream reports and sleep talk that occurred during REM sleep, however, this is not clearly the case. Arkin et al (1966) examined the dream reports and sleep talk of a habitual sleep talker (S) to find correlations between the two.…”

Section: Room For Skepticism: What the Received View Does Not Explainmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A famous example is the case of Paul Ingram, a man who began to report bizarre false memories about incest and Satanist cults after hypnotic suggestion (Ofshe, 1992). This gives further reason to be wary of aforementioned experiments of Arkin et al (1966, 1970a,b), which involved hypnotism. Heaps and Nash used the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GSS; Gudjonsson, 1984) to identify interrogative suggestibility (susceptibility to the influence of an authoritative questioning source) and hypnotic suggestibility (susceptibility to influence under hypnosis) in test subjects.…”

Section: Individual Differences In Dream Report Fabricationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

Rosen

2013

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I propose a narrative fabrication thesis of dream reports, according to which dream reports are often not accurate representations of experiences that occur during sleep. I begin with an overview of anti-experience theses of Norman Malcolm and Daniel Dennett who reject the received view of dreams, that dreams are experiences we have during sleep which are reported upon waking. Although rejection of the first claim of the received view, that dreams are experiences that occur during sleep, is implausible, I evaluate in more detail the second assumption of the received view, that dream reports are generally accurate. I then propose a “narrative fabrication” view of dreams as an alternative to the received view. Dream reports are often confabulated or fabricated because of poor memory, bizarre dream content, and cognitive deficits. It is well documented that narratives can be altered between initial rapid eye movement sleep awakenings and subsequent reports. I argue that we have reason to suspect that initial reports are prone to inaccuracy. Experiments demonstrate that subjects rationalize strange elements in narratives, leaving out supernatural or bizarre components when reporting waking memories of stories. Inaccuracies in dream reports are exacerbated by rapid memory loss and bizarre dream content. Waking memory is a process of reconstruction and blending of elements, but unlike waking memory, we cannot reality-test for dream memories. Dream experiences involve imaginative elements, and dream content cannot be verified with external evidence. Some dreams may involve wake-like higher cognitive functions, such as lucid dreams. Such dreams are more likely to elicit accurate reports than cognitively deficient dreams. However, dream reports are generally less accurate than waking reports. I then propose methods which could verify the narrative fabrication view, and argue that although the theory cannot be tested with current methods, new techniques and technologies may be able to do so in the future.

show abstract

Section: Room For Skepticism: What the Received View Does Not Explainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Individual Differences In Dream Report Fabricationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

Rosen

2013

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have addressed the accuracy of such self-reports. Arkin, Toth, Baker, and Hastey (1970) used a novel procedure to examine this issue. They identified a set of sleep talkers with good recall and hypnotized them to sleep talk about their dreams (and nightmares) as they occurred.…”

Section: Nightmares and Dreamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonwaking Responses to Waking Stressors: Dreams and Nightmares¹

Cook¹,

Caplan

Wolowitz

1990

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A distinction between self‐reported dreams and nightmares made it possible to test the relative sensitivity of these nonwaking cognitions to different kinds of life stressors including combat expasure, childhood and adolescent stressom, and recent life events. Survey interview data were collected on 442 men from the cohort eligible for military duty during the Vietnam Conflict who varied in their partiapation in that war. Dreams were over 3.5 times more prevalent than nightmares. Nevertheless, it was the prevalence, frequency, and content of nightmares, not dreams, that were consistently associated with life stresors. Links between nonwaking cognitions and life stressors are explored with regard to hypothesized mechanisms involving affect and cognition, wish fulfillment, and working‐through processes.

show abstract

“…Sleeptalking is common in the general population, may have a genetic component [171], and may occur in REM or NREM sleep [172,173]. Most cases are not associated with serious psychopathology [174].…”

Section: Somniloquy (Sleeptalking)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non–Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Parasomnias

Mahowald

Schenck

2005

Neurologic Clinics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parasomnias are unpleasant or undesirable behavioral or experiential phenomena that occur during sleep. Once believed unitary phenomena related to psychiatric disorders, it is now clear that parasomnias result from several different phenomena and usually are not related to psychiatric conditions. Parasomnias are categorized as primary (disorders of the sleep states) and secondary (disorders of other organ systems that manifest themselves during sleep). Primary sleep parasomnias can be classified according to the sleep state of origin: rapid eye movement sleep, non-rapid eye movement sleep, and miscellaneous (those not respecting sleep state). Secondary sleep parasomnias are classified by the organ system involved.

show abstract

The Degree of Concordance Between the Content of Sleep Talking and Mentation Recalled in Wakefulness

Cited by 29 publications

References 0 publications

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

Nonwaking Responses to Waking Stressors: Dreams and Nightmares¹

Non–Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Parasomnias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Degree of Concordance Between the Content of Sleep Talking and Mentation Recalled in Wakefulness

Cited by 29 publications

References 0 publications

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

What I make up when I wake up: anti-experience views and narrative fabrication of dreams

Nonwaking Responses to Waking Stressors: Dreams and Nightmares1

Non–Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Parasomnias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Nonwaking Responses to Waking Stressors: Dreams and Nightmares¹